Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drchrono


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. j⚛e deckertalk 16:36, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Drchrono

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I recognize that this meets the GNG, but it is nonetheless an insignificant company--its total revenue for 2013 is $2.8 million. The GNG does not force us to have an article in fields where there is an exceptional amount of hype.  DGG ( talk ) 16:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  17:10, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Could use a rewrite, but there is sufficient coverage from major Reliable Sources. Even the nominator concedes that the subject meets GNG. --MelanieN (talk) 18:50, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 17:18, 23 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep As MelanieN points out, the nominator concedes WP:GNG. I think there have to he very compelling reasons to nevertheless delete an article that meets WP:GNG. Automated health data recording on personalized devices are where the technology is headed.  So, I see no reason to entertain deletion. I am One of Many (talk) 06:14, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - This badly needs a rewrite, but there looks to be enough sources in the article itself to meet WP:GNG. I think a bit of POV needs to be removed and fleshing out needs to happen, but I can see this as meeting our inclusion criteria.   Red Phoenix  let's talk... 16:40, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * comment WP:N is very clear that meeting the GNG does not mean that there must be an article. We have the right to judge to what extent the notability corresponds to somethign realistic for an encyclopedia. DGG' ( talk ) 05:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.